QUINN: Selection process a sham

In response to The Press' editorial, "Quinn: Choice earns A+," I say this: Where there's the scent of fertilizer there's usually fertilizer present. The process of selecting Ms. Quinn reeks of the same old manipulation and self-perpetuation tactics of the Coeur d'Alene School Board. While one cannot dispute Ms. Quinn's education pedigree, neither can anyone seriously dispute that (a) Ms. Quinn is a liberal education insider likely to be resistant to serious reform; and (b) she was picked by a lame-duck board to thwart the will of the voters.

Here's where the stench originates from: (1) It's been common knowledge since March that Edie Brooks would resign and appoint Wanda Quinn; (2) the voters voted for new trustees who were distinctly NOT education insiders, and promised to do things differently; (3) Immediately after the election Edie publicly lamented the newly elected "barbarians at the gates," and has since touted her "right" to select a like-minded successor for "her" seat; (4) the lame-duck board rushed the appointment -- despite the fact that the Idaho Code gives the board up to four months to appoint a successor, they used only three weeks, with very little public notice to bring forward the best candidates.

Sure, Ms. Quinn has good education credentials, but in outlook and worldview is decidedly NOT what the voters wanted. The process employed by the board was a sham, engineered to keep control of the board. The new trustees should have been given a voice in the selection process.

BEATE SHEVALIER

Former educator

Coeur d'Alene